Tag managers on WordPress sites and Interaction to Next Paint
Google Tag Manager (93.9%), Matomo Tag Manager (7.3%), Tealium iQ (0.7%), Segment (1.3%), and Adobe Launch (<0.1%) across 34,882 sites.
7.3% of WordPress sites use Matomo Tag Manager tag managers, and 100% of those sites have a good INP, against 100% of all WordPress sites.
0.7% of WordPress sites use Tealium iQ tag managers, and 82% of those sites have a good LCP, against 76% of all WordPress sites.
Core Web Vitals pass rate
Sites with Matomo Tag Manager tag managers have a good INP most often: 100%, against 100% of all WordPress sites. Sites with Tealium iQ tag managers have it least often, at 99%.
Sites with Tealium iQ tag managers have a good LCP most often: 82%, against 76% of all WordPress sites. Sites with Google Tag Manager tag managers have it least often, at 74%.
Tag managers usage
Google Tag Manager is the most used: 93.9% of WordPress sites. Matomo Tag Manager is 7.3% of WordPress sites.
Tag managers per framework
On jQuery, 95% of sites use Google Tag Manager tag managers, and 100% of jQuery sites have a good INP, against 100% of all sites. On Vue, 87% of sites use Google Tag Manager, and 99% of Vue sites have a good INP.
On jQuery, 95% of sites use Google Tag Manager tag managers, and 75% of jQuery sites have a good LCP, against 76% of all sites. On Vue, 87% of sites use Google Tag Manager, and 75% of Vue sites have a good LCP.
jQuery 33,473 sitesGoogle Tag Manager (GTM) 95%100%75%
React 1,382 sitesGoogle Tag Manager (GTM) 92%100%66%
Vue 1,777 sitesGoogle Tag Manager (GTM) 87%Matomo Tag Manager 15%99%75%
Alpine 304 sitesGoogle Tag Manager (GTM) 96%99%82%Tag managers or the framework
Does the framework explain the tag managers difference?
On jQuery, 100% of sites with Matomo Tag Manager tag managers have a good INP, against 100% of jQuery sites with Google Tag Manager. Within jQuery, sites with Matomo Tag Manager and Google Tag Manager have a good INP about equally often. On Vue, 100% of sites with Matomo Tag Manager tag managers have a good INP, against 100% of Vue sites with Google Tag Manager. Within Vue, sites with Matomo Tag Manager and Google Tag Manager have a good INP about equally often.
On jQuery, 82% of sites with Tealium iQ tag managers have a good LCP, against 73% of jQuery sites with Google Tag Manager. Within jQuery, sites with Tealium iQ have a good LCP more often. On Vue, 71% of sites with Google Tag Manager tag managers have a good LCP, against 75% of Vue sites with Matomo Tag Manager. Within Vue, sites with Google Tag Manager and Matomo Tag Manager have a good LCP about equally often.
How container triggers execute third-party listeners on click and keypress
A tag manager's own loader is small, but click and form-submit triggers run synchronously inside user interaction frames. Among the 34,882 sites with a tag manager, 93.9% use Google Tag Manager (100% good INP) and 7.3% use Matomo Tag Manager (100% good INP), whereas sites running heavier enterprise containers such as Tealium iQ (0.7%, 99% good INP), Adobe Launch (<0.1%, 100%), and Segment (1.3%, 100%) record lower good INP pass rates.
Understanding tag managers
Audit container tags regularly to prune inactive pixels, replace synchronous All Elements click triggers with targeted selectors, and move marketing tags to server-side containers where possible. Across sites with a tag manager, 93.9% use Google Tag Manager (100% good INP), 7.3% use Matomo Tag Manager (100% good INP), and 1.3% use Segment (100% good INP).
By Arjen Karel · 63,295 crawled WordPress sites (17,005 with desktop Chrome field data, 34,882 sites with tag managers, October 2026). How we measured.